NIPC Law

Tipstaff By Simon Speed - Originally uploaded through the Britain Loves Wikipedia website. Public Domain,  h ttps://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10585201   Jane Lambert Chancery Division (HH Judge Paul Matthews)  Bargain Busting Ltd v Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd and others [2026] EWHC 933 (Ch) (23 April 2026) These were applications by Shenzgen SKE Technology Limited ("SST") and their trade mark attorneys to strike out an application by Bargain Busting Ltd. ("BBL") to commit them to prison for contempt of court.  There was also a cross-application from BBL to add another of SST's trade mark attorneys as an additional respondent to the contempt proceedings. Alleged Contempt The alleged contempt was "Criminal contempt (intentional interference with the administration of justice) by seeking to prevent or delay the registration of a trademark as directed by the High Court." BBL had applied to register CRYSTAL BAR as a UK trade mark.  SST opp...

Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Arnold, Lady Justice Elizabeth Laing and Lord Justice Warby) Bargain Busting Ltd v Shenzhen SKE Technology Co. Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 532 (8 May 2026) This was an appeal by Bargain Busting Ltd ("BBL") against an interim injunction restraining threats of trade mark infringement proceedings granted by Mr Justice Miles (as he then was) on 27 May 2025 on the application of Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd ("SKE") for the reasons he gave in  Bargain Busting Ltd v Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd and others [2025] EWHC 1239 (Ch) (21 May 2025).  I discussed that judgment in  Threats Actions - Bargain Busting v Shenzhen Technology   on 29 May 2925. Background The claimant, BBL was the registered proprietor of UK trade marks UK00003235344  ("344") and UK00003534551  ("551"), which the defendant, SKE, challenged on the grounds of non-use and invalidity. BBL also applied to register CRYSTAL BAR as a trade mark under ...

Nucleus of 103P/Hartley as imaged during a spacecraft flyby Author  NASA/JPL-Caltech/UMD   Licence  Public Domain   Source  Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Patents Court (Michael Tappin KC) Thaler v The Co mptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks ( Re Permission to Appeal) [2025] EWHC 3072 (Ch) (21 Nov 2025) In Thaler v The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Mark s [2025] EWHC 2202 (Ch) (1 Sept 2025), Mr Michael Tappin KC, sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court, dismissed an appeal by Dr Stephen Thaler ("Dr Thaler") against the decision of Mr Andrew Bushell in Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks O/0764/24 of 24 Aug 2024.  I discussed that case in The Return of DABUS   on 7 Sept 2025. The case note summarizes the history of the litigation and links to other articles that I have written about DABUS ("Device for Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience") and the efforts of its...

  Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Coulson, Arnold and Zacaroli) easyGroup Ltd v Easy Live (Services) Ltd and others [2025] EWCA Civ 946 (24 July 2025) This was an appeal by easyGroup Ltd ("easyGroup")  against the order of Mr Nicolas Caddick KC of 17 Sept 2024 dismissing that company's claims for trade mark infringement and a declaration of invalidity against Easy Live (Services) Ltd. ("ELS") for the reasons set out in his judgment in easyGroup Ltd v Easy Live (Services) Ltd and others [2024] EWHC 2282 (Ch) (4 Sept 2024).  There was also a cross-appeal against Mr Caddick's dismissal of ELS's counterclaim for revocation of one of the claimant's trade marks for non-use.  I discussed Mr Caddick's judgment in  Trade Marks - easyGroup Ltd v Easy Live (Services) Ltd .  on 10 Sept 2024.   The Variant Forms Issue One of Lord Justice Arnold's reasons for permitting both the appeal and cross-appeal was that Mr Caddick's conclusion o...

  Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lord Justices Coulson, Arnold and Zacaroli)   easyGroup Ltd v Easyfundraising Ltd and others [2025] EWCA Civ 1000 (24 July 2025) This note should be read in conjunction with  Trade Marks and Passing off - easyGroup Ltd v Easyfundraising Ltd  which I published on 23 Sep 2024 in  NIPC Law .  In that note, I discussed Mr Justice Fancourt's judgment in  easyGroup Ltd v Easyfundraising Ltd and others  [2024] EWHC 2323 (Ch) (11 Sep 2024).  In the ante-penultimate paragraph, I noted that Mr Justice Fancourt's judgment had raised an issue over "variant forms" within the meaning of  s.46 (2)  of the Trade Marks Act 1994 that had to be resolved by the Court of Appeal.  The Variant Forms Issue I anticipated an appeal because the same issue had arisen in easyGroup Ltd v Easy Live (Services) Ltd and others [2024] EWHC 2282 (Ch) (4 Sept 2024), which I blogged in Trade Marks - easyGroup Ltd v Easy Live (Serv...